Chris' Blincoln Blogs

What’s the biggest crowd you’ve played to? 5? 50? 500? 5000? What’s the most important crowd you’ve played to? The answer…ALL of them!

I remember the 1st time I played this little Cigar bar in Troy, Ohio I think there were maybe a total of 4 people there one of which was an employee 2 other there by coincidence. However, there was one gentleman there who had seen my posters up in the bar prior and come just to hear me play. Afterwards he commented that he was surprised and impressed as he felt I really “played” and played as if I didn’t care how many people were there. He said he expected me to just “go thru the motions”. That same guy also bought a CD, signed up on my mailing list and came back every time I played there. This type of situation has happened to me numerous times. The reason for is I treat every crowd as if I’m playing to tens of thousands. Sometimes it’s a bit difficult I’ll admit. Sometimes it’s simply a matter of visualization. I just pretend in my head I’m playing a stadium show.

Why is even a crowd of one so valuable and important? One reason…you never know just WHO is in the audience. I’ve heard countless stories of a musician landing a big break because there just happened to be someone of industry importance in the audience and yes, I’ve actually heard of a few stories of musicians blowing a chance because they played like they didn’t care and didn’t realize just WHO was in the audience.

However, a bigger reason is each member of your audience is important and should performed to as so. Whether it’s 10 or 10,000 you should always try to win over as many as possible and sometimes playing to a smaller crowd is actually easier as you often have more of their attention but often takes more personal motivation on your own part. Sure it’s great to play to a huge crowd and often that can easily add inspiration to perform better of course, but, a true “performer” can and should be able to perform well in front of any crowd regardless of the size.

Another thing to keep in mind is numbers are relative. How would you feel playing to 20 people? Obviously not a good feeling if you’re doing an arena show but for a coffee shop that could mean a packed house. Does playing in front of a thousand people sound cool? What if it were a mall and 999 of them were just walking by and not even paying attention, then you might really only be playing to 1 person that is actually listening. However, you should still play your you know what off as that’s an opportunity to win over that one.

The real goal is about connecting with your audience and as many of them as you can regardless of the size. I guarantee every performer has played to all sized crowds most of which started off small. There used to be a shampoo commercial that said something to the effect of I told 2 friends about my shampoo, and they told 2 friends, and so on and so on and so on…you get the idea. So keep this in mind next time you play to a crowd of one.

Most of you know what drones are…those pesky little flying machines that many Go Pro users have to get amazing video footage while sometimes invading privacy or at the very least, making us feel like we’re being watched because well, we are. As drones became popular laws and legislation was created and passed governing their use and rightfully so. So why is it as soon as that technology entered the mainstream government was quick to get on with legal matters yet technology changed in the music industry way before drones and we are still governed by laws dating back to 1909 and the World War II era? Odd, ironic, and sad at the same time.

Enter the MMA…no, musicians are not cage fighting with congress although that’s what it seems like needed to happen to get things rolling in our favor. I’m referring to the Music Modernization Act. In a nutshell it is a bill that will allow songwriters and musicians to get paid more royalties from downloads as well as streaming services like Spotify and will also help find homes for unclaimed royalties. It’s also a bill that hopefully will get the music tech companies like Spotify and Apple on the same page and same side with musicians. The two teams have been at odds with each other for years. Ironic that it’s called the MMA.

Like any new bill there are arguments on both sides for and against as well as pros and cons to the bill. The bottom line though is musician royalties are being governed by a very antiquated law and like technology, those laws need to brought up to date. It is the equivalent of having speeding laws created at time when horse and buggy were the main means of transportation. We know longer travel mostly by horse and buggy so the speeding laws were updated. The travel means for music has changed so those laws need to be updated as well. Who knows…soon we may be listening to streaming music while riding in a drone ;)

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain…a well-known line from the movie The Wizard of Oz. It comes up in the scene where Dorothy and her friends discover that the “Wizard” of Oz is really nothing more than a mortal man behind a curtain with some gadgets.

Recently I saw a Facebook post that was a gripe about musical artists that do not write their own songs with a picture of Fab Morvan and Rob Pilatus collectively known as Milli Vanilli. First off, to set the record straight Milli Vanilli not only did not write their material they also did not even perform it which yes, I feel is total fraud. However, as far as artists writing their own material, spoiler alert….many (if not most) artists in the Pop and Country genre’s do not write their own material. Even in the late 80’s many Rock artists (Heart, Aerosmith, Kiss) did not write most of their hits. This is the way it has been done WAY before even Elvis. While many may look down upon this think of it it this way…do actors write their own lines? No, screenwriters and a writing team do. Behind every performer in the entertainment world (which pretty much is EVERY performer) there is a team of people that make that happen. Producers, writers, engineers, managers, booking agent, publicists, PR firms, and the list go on.

I heard it was George Straight that said (although don’t hold me to that – either way it’s rather profound) “If I sing it they think I wrote it, if I wrote they think I lived it”. Unfortunately that’s how many people perceive performers and they forget that they are exactly that… “Performers”, basically actors and entertainers. Is it pretty amazing when such a performer DOES write their own songs? Of course, as well as if they produce their albums etc. But, is an artist obligated to be their own writer, producer, engineer etc? Where do we then draw the line? I don’t think it’s realistic to expect that a musician do all those things mentioned above (although many do at least several of them, myself included) and obviously the more of those they do the more they deserve respect, provided they do them well. That’s where the problem begins. Like anything, we as people can only do so many things and do them well, at some point some areas begin to suffer. So, would you rather have an amazing singer that makes a song totally come alive and hit home with you such as a Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, (insert favorite singer that doesn’t write songs) or a great writer that can’t perform their song well enough to excite you?

The point is, some are performers yet not writers and some are writers yet not performers. Some are business minds that love music and many musicians are not business minded. That is why artists have teams and when you get a great combination of all those individuals in those specialized areas, magic happens…the perfect storm. Just like actors have writers, the director, the makeup person, and camera crew, musicians have many behind the scenes that help them give a star performance and sometimes that means not writing their own songs but relying on writers who excel in that area. That is also why songwriters have jobs. So think about this next time you hear a song on the radio that REALLY moves you…that performer delivered it in way that made you go “WOW!” Does it really matter if they wrote it or not? Oh and one last thought…you know that song by Barry Manilow called “I Write the Songs”? Well, he didn’t write it ;)

Truth be told at the risk of sounding arrogant, I'm a better guitar player than the majority of artist that I produce. Most are more than very capable and some are quite good. Many however ask me to play guitar on their song for them whether I co-wrote it or not because they feel I'm a better guitarist than they are. That being said, more often than not I still have them play the song instead. Why? Why would you not have the better player do the part? Because most of the time it's not about what is "better" but rather what is better for the SONG. Often the artists that I have play on the song offer a different twist, feel, or vibe than I would simply because they may not be as proficient. Whether it be due to lack of technical ability or just out of naivity there might be a certain characteristic that their playing ads. You may ask "but wouldn't a more accomplished player be able to replicate that? Yes more than likely but it would not come as naturally and possibly sound a bit more contrived then the natural musical beauty of innocence. Often in music just as in real life imperfections are what make things unique and enable us to have an attachment to them as humans since we are all imperfect to some degree. Sometimes things that are too perfect lose the essence that makes it beautiful and that is why Better is not Best

I heard a Phil Collins song on the radio the other day and it got me thinking…remember when MTV used to play music videos? Video totally changed the game for the music biz as now everyone’s first exposure to an artist was their image at the same time as their music. Prior because of radio it was always music first then image. Thus began the artist “branding” as we know it today and I blame, er…credit MTV for that. Artists were constantly trying to outdo each other with crazy hair, wild outfits, and other visual effects but there was one artist that never really did any of that yet was a major success thru MTV, Phil Collins. Yes other artists like Billy Joel and Huey Lewis were made famous by MTV but even they were wearing flamboyant blazer and other attire to stand out. Yes there was Elton John but well, he always was a little flamboyant. Some might say Bruce Springsteen but he was already pretty popular before he was on MTV thanks to radio but Phil Collins wasn’t really a house hold name until his music hit MTV. And THAT is exactly what did it, his MUSIC. He really didn’t have much of an “image’, heck, I personally think the guy is a little goofy looking but extremely talented and he wrote great songs. So what’s the point of this blog? That even in the heyday of over the top imaging and visuals sometimes, just sometimes, great music still prevails.

Often as a musician (or in any field where fees are negotiated) there is a saying something to the effect of 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. However, I recently realized that is not always the case.

First, a brief overview of songwriting income and how it’s split. In the songwriting world much of the income from a song is split between the people who wrote it and publishers. In a nutshell version, half of the song’s income goes to the writer(s) and half to the publisher(s) so if you wrote a song with another person and neither of you had signed away the publishing you would both get half of the writer’s share and half of the publisher’s share, essentially 50/50. Now let’s say you both wrote the song yet your co-writer had signed a publishing deal then his publishing portion is split between him and his publisher. Breakdown = you get 50% (your writer share and your publisher share), he gets 25% (his writer share) and his publisher gets 25% (his publishing share. Get the idea? This is a very general example but should get the idea across. Obviously there are many ways this can be divvied up but this should give you an idea of how that works. The writer should ALWAYS retain his portion of the writer’s share. Since a publisher helps to get a song placed (among other many duties) it can be very beneficial to give up your publishing share to a publisher as it can mean much more revenue and other successes down the road. Hence, 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

In the Film/TV music world a music library basically acts as the publisher so the same standard applies. If I sign a song that I wrote by myself to a music library they typically become the publisher and therefore get the publisher’s share and I get my writer’s share. Often when a song is placed there is also an upfront payment (sync fee) which is typically split 50/50 also. One thing about music libraries unlike conventional music publishers is that often the deals can be “non-exclusive” which means I can have the same song signed to multiple libraries. Some deals are “exclusive” which means I can only have it signed to that one library. There are goods/bads to both but that is all beyond the scope of this blog for now but just know both types of deals exist in the Film/TV music world.

Now the meat of it all. Recently I was offered a deal from a library ( we won’t mention any names but they CouldB and Entertainment company you might Google …oops, did that slip? ;) ) that was an Exclusive deal (OK, I’ve done those before) they get the entire publisher share (again very standard) BUT also wanted HALF of MY writer’s share? Say what??? That’s 75% of the entire pie! I even had to email them to make sure that wasn’t a typo. Nope, that’s their “deal”. As Dr. Evil would say…”How about NOOOOOOO… you crazy Dutch bastard!”. OK, so I don’t know if he was Dutch (nothing wrong with that) but he definitely was the other. I literally had to wait 24 hours before responding to their offer to avoid telling them they could bleep bleep bleep themselves and just replied with a professional “No thank you”.

I had mentioned this to other industry professionals and they also felt this company was out of their minds and I truly hope no song writers out there ever sign this kind of deal. No writer should EVER give up their writer’s share to someone who was NOT a writer of the song. This is a case where 100% of zero WAS better and here’s why. The exclusive deal meant I could not pursue other avenues with the song...now I can. I have also hung onto my integrity as well as my writer’s share and stuck up for my rights as a creator. Why would I give half of my writer’s share to a party that DID NOT write any of the song? Too often musicians give in to a bad deal out of desperation and fear of saying “No”. It’s OK to say no because sometimes 100% of Zero can be a better deal.

I currently reside in Nashville which is affectionately known as Music City. However lately the music part has begun to shrink. There has been an influx of people moving into condos across from bars and complaining about the music which leaves me scratching my head. Would you move near an airport only to complain about the noise? Another issue here is some home studio owners like Lij Shaw (who has worked with acts such as Tori Amos, Zac Brown Band, and Ani Defranco among many others) has received a cease and desist from the city for operating a home studio which is to some degree the life blood of this city. He was also told to no longer operate his Podcast on YouTube as it falls under a “home business” definition even though it is strictly on the Internet which has me scratching my head even more as that has nothing to do with having clients in your house? All this makes me ponder the future of “Music City”

This past week I received an offer from a music library for an exclusive deal on one of my tracks. An exclusive deal is not uncommon in that world and neither is wanting 100% of the publishing share. Typically the library will take the publishing share which leaves the writer (me) with the writer’s share, essentially a 50/50 split. However, this music library (and now I use that term loosely) ALSO wanted 50% of my writer’s share…wait a tick! Huh? That’s basically they get 75% of the pie. NOT a common practice and I hope no songwriter ever agrees to such a deal. My fear is many desperate and naïve musicians fall prey to such a thing which would only further devalue an already devalued product…music

I used to play the cafe area in several Borders books and music stores all around the Cincinnati region on Friday and Saturday nights. I was only paid $50 but it was only a 2 hour gig and I always sold a bunch of CD's, got people signed up on my mailing list, and gained a following of regulars. People could come out on a weekend night not have to deal with a loud smoky bar and hear good music, enjoy a cappuccino, and peruse a book or two. It was a win - win situation for all. I made a little money, Borders made money, and people had a nice place to hang out. Then someone in their corporate office decided why should they pay musicians? I’m sure we can just get them to play for free. As a result the professional touring artist such as myself were not going to play for free so they basically got anybody who could strum a guitar. As a result the music was sub-par, people quit coming to hang out long story short within the next 2 years all Borders had closed. Yeah, what's that they say about Karma? I'm not saying that that was the definite reason that Borders closed but I can’t help but wonder if that had caused some sort of trickle-down effect?

Last month my blog was about the many hats that musicians have to wear these days but sometimes it’s not best to try to do it all. DIY means Do It Yourself but that doesn’t necessarily mean Do It ALL Yourself. Sometimes it’s a good idea to “pass the hat”. This can be for a number of reasons. The first being the age old battle of Time vs. Money. For example, let’s say your time is worth $25 an hour and you absolutely despise cutting your grass. If you can get someone to do it for say $12.50 an hour you can spend your time making that back times two. Unless you just don’t have the money to spend (which often musicians may not) or just LOVE cutting your grass you may want to consider passing that hat to someone else. No, this is not about yard work I just used that as an example ;).

Another reason you may want to pass the hat is there may be a better qualified person. You just can’t be great at everything and although there are some things you may not need to be “great” at to get it done some things such as maybe your graphic design, your website, or guitar repairs might better off being done by a pro.

Lastly though, a reason people may not consider at first is simply so you can focus on more important things. It would be rather difficult for you to be your own photographer (other than the proverbial “selfie”) and concentrate on your look and lighting while to look “cool” in your photos. I have begun working on a new album which is all solo instrumental acoustic guitar - one guitar, no overdubs. While I have a pretty good home studio and know my gear fairly well I would be splitting my focus up between trying to get a great performance and being an engineer also. Because of this I have opted to record my album at a good friend’s (Dave Harris) studio and let him do what he does best which is engineer while I can focus solely on my playing. This way I’m not trying to wear two hats at the same time ;).

I have been known to wear many hats both literally and figuratively. As a musician, the latter, especially these days is imperative. Traditionally a professional musician pretty much had to just worry about making music and hope they can gain the interest of other parties (record labels, managers, etc.) to do the rest. While that is still a valid option and one that many hope and strive for, it may not happen for many musicians. However, all is not lost. Welcome to the age of DYI. But what if you don’t want to Do It Yourself and still hope on getting a team of others interested so you can just make music? Well, here’s the reality check…for the most part, to get those people interested you need to have already established yourself to a certain degree. How do you that? That’s right…DYI.

Here are just a few of the many roles that musicians these days usually have to become:

And trust me there are many more. Now, I am ALL about hiring a person to do as many of these as possible especially the ones you may not be very skilled at and I firmly believe it is better to pay a Pro and get it done right than do it yourself and do a poor job. However, some of these you may find that you (or other band members) excel at and may actually enjoy doing. Here’s another plus side to being able to do some of these…one, you have more control over the results, two, you become acquainted enough with a task that you can better convey your ideas to a pro at it as well as possibly keep you from getting taking to the cleaners. We’ve all heard horror stories about bands that lost thousands of dollars by dishonest managers.

How many of those have I had to do? Pretty much all of them and more. Some I excelled and enjoyed more than others. Recently I have become a bit of a videographer and video editor as I am filming a series of online guitar instructional videos and although it has been a bit of learning curve, I have really enjoyed it. It's fun to play Steven Spielberg. Have I hired people to do tasks for me? Absolutely! Having had done some of those myself however definitely gave me an advantage when hiring someone else to do it.

The bad news is there has never been a time where musicians are expected to more. The good news there has never been a time that has been easier to learn to wear all these different hats and give musicians so much control over their creativity and career. So as you go out and independently dress for success I’ll leave you with this metaphor…make sure YOUR hat matches your wardrobe ;)

I saw Jason Bonham’s Led Zeppelin Experience (son of Led Zeppelin drummer the late John “Bonzo” Bonham) recently and while often children of celebrities try to go out of their way to separate them from their celebrity parents and make their own mark (which I totally understand) I was very pleasantly surprised to see him totally embrace his father’s legacy. Not only did he embrace it, it was apparent he genuinely wanted to carry it forward which I thought was very impressive.

I have always been a big Zeppelin fan and they are one band that is seems like the more I listen to them, the more I respect them. Yes, there are a few guitar solos where Jimmy Page is a bit sloppy but when I see live footage of him and how he replicates the multiple guitar parts he over-dubbed in the studio live it more than makes up for those recordings. John Paul Jones is very much a hidden gem in the band as his bass and keyboard lines seem so subtle most don’t realize how brilliant they are til you listen close. Robert Plant to me is (arguably) the very first REAL frontman of Rock and Roll but they are also one of the 1st bands where the drums had a HUGE Impact on the sound. I really hadn’t realized this til a few years ago when I had purchased a sample pack of “Bonham Beats”. Basically just the drum beats to some Zeppelin songs, recorded by another drummer … although spot on! Just by the drum beat alone I could exactly what song each was. A rarity by most accounts. Many songs the drums for the most part are a basic beat but not Bonham’s. Every single beat stood out and the song was easily recognizable while not being over-kill as to take away from the song. The sign of not just a drummer, but a “Musician”.

People have often posed the question to me…The Stones or The Beatles? To which I always reply, Led Zeppelin. Nothing against the other 2 bands as they are awesome and most definitely a part of Rock and Roll history and have very much influenced 10s of thousands as well as, by my assumption, probably outsold Zeppelin. But, while The Stones are more “raw” and in the more “garage band” type sound and The Beatles were a little more “Pop” and polished, Led Zeppelin, to me anyway, always seemed to bridge that gap and up the musicianship, versatility, and experimentation a bit more. Not that the other 2 were not experimental but Zep just seem to have a certain chemistry to them and while Plant and Page were always the main focus, they are one band that would have not sounded the same had they replaced any member. Perhaps that’s why when Bonzo died they decided not to carry on? While many drummers are able to play Led Zeppelin and many bands can cover it, there will only be ONE Led Zeppelin